Skip to comments.Butch Otter’s succession sparks a GOP family feud in Idaho
Posted on 04/28/2006 3:46:44 PM PDT by Clintonfatigued
The six-way race to win the Republican nomination in Idahos 1st Congressional District has turned into a full-fledged family feud, fraught with intraparty tensions and resentments.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
Which means he is notta rhinoceroses. This guy is supported by Club for Growth and that's good enough for me.
The following excerpt is worth reading:
"The states two senators, Republicans Larry Craig and Mike Crapo, have stayed on the sidelines, but Craigs wife, Suzanne, is the chairman of Norm Semankos campaign. Semanko, an attorney for Idaho Water Users, had worked for Craig as an aide in Washington and Idaho.
Still, Craigs former aides are divided among Semanko, state Controller Keith Johnson and former state Sen. Sheila Sorensen, Republicans say. The political leg up that Semanko expected from his ties to Craig never materialized.
Rep. Mike Simpson (R-Idaho) has endorsed his longtime friend Sorensen, but several Idaho Republicans said Simpsons bigger goal is to stop Sali. The two men had a strained relationship in the state House.
They were often on opposing sides of issues, an Idaho Republican candidate said. Sali was considered a grandstander. He just had to get on television.
Salis critics pointed to an incident earlier this month in which he insisted on discussing studies linking abortion to breast cancer during a debate on a bill to require doctors to inform women about abortion-related risks. The Idaho House Democratic leader, a survivor of breast cancer, walked out in tears, and her Democratic colleagues followed her.
The Idaho GOP leaders postponed the days business. The Speaker, Bruce Newcomb, told The Idaho Statesman, That idiot is just an absolute idiot. He doesnt have one ounce of empathy in his whole fricking body. And you can put that in the paper.
Sali said that he and Newcomb have deep philosophical differences and that Newcomb does not like him because he has outmaneuvered Newcomb on different pieces of legislation.
With Sali attacking Vasquez on immigration and Sorensen on abortion, and Semanko unable to move beyond his agricultural base of support, Johnson could be the best-positioned candidate.
He has won endorsements from Jack Riggs, Idahos lieutenant governor; Phil Batt, a former GOP governor; and the D.C.-based Business Industry Political Action Committee (BIPAC). Otters top campaign aide is working for Johnson in northern Idaho.
BIPAC endorsed Johnson in an attempt to stop Sali or Vasquez from winning the primary."
I don't blame the establihsment for opposing Sali, who is right on the issues but a flake. But their opposition to Vasquez is based on ignorance.
As for Sheila Sorenson, she seems like a nice lady, but her politics are pure RINO.
I support Bill Sali.
Bill spent the last 18 years in the Legislature fighting hard for conservatism. He's proven.
If he doesn't win, liberal Sheila Sorensen will.
THAT would be a crying shame.
The rest of the pack needs to retire from the field, pronto.
The establishment tries to paint every conservative as a flake. I know, I'm from Ohio. Where they do it all the time.
I serious wonder how I can continue to support a party that is so anti my beliefs even if the Dems are worse.
A flake? Because a bunch of RINOs hate him and mischaracterize anything and everything he says and does?
Sorry, but we could use a whole bunch more 'flakes' like Sali. He's as solid as it gets.
But their opposition to Vasquez is based on ignorance.
In many other cases, Robert would have been an awesome Congressional candidate. But this one wasn't it.
I have lots of friends in Idaho conservative politics.
They all support Bill Sali.
He's been THE pro-life, pro-family, pro-gun leader in the House for a very long time.
I would be very happy if either Vasquez or Sali won. They're the two conservatives in the race.
In addition to the Club for Growth endorsement, Bill Sali also has the support of Mike Pence and most of the members of the Republican Study Committee.
And he's bucked his party on tax increased. State parties hate that but I love it.
He's never once voted for a tax increase in eighteen years in office.
Go Vasquez !
Speaking for myself, I support Robert Vasquez. He's a decorated Vietnam veteran, and he's willing to speak out on an issue that the corporate establishment wants to keep silent on. Also, he will belie the myth that all Hispanics are opposed to border security.
Absent a Vasquez victory, I lean towards Keith Johnson. There aren't enough Certified Public Accountants in Congress and he would be a step towards correcting that.
I know of two right off the top of my head: Mike Conaway of TX and John Campbell of CA. Both talk a pretty good game but are real squishy if you look close.
I have no idea what is so attractive about a CPA. We already got plenty of congresscritters who know how to cook the books.
Putting that aside, though...I know what's going on on the ground in the district...it's going to be either Sorensen or Sali.
Take your pick.
Are you a native of Idaho?
By the way, you have a very clever tagline.
I like what I've seen of Sali so far. And, if this is any sort of benchmark, one of my very socialist coworkers despises him.
What's attractive about a CPA is that the government budgets and beaurocracies are absurdly complex and their background would help them work through the mazes.
Better a CPA than a lawyer.
Robert is a great guy, and handles himself well. He's been a hero in the border wars. I'd be pleased to see him in Congress.
But, unfortunately, all he can do now is play the spoiler and hand the seat to the very liberal Sheila Sorensen.
Which he may well do.
Which will be a crying shame. If conservatives can't get their act together enough to hold onto a seat like ID 1, that doesn't bode well.
Sure. But the CPA's I know of in Congress haven't really been exactly reformers.
What we need are more engineers, they have logical, analytical minds.
I think, IIRC, that there isn't a runoff, so a RINO like Sorensen could emerge with a very small % of the vote. That has been a major disaster in so many races that I've cited previously (Schwarz in MI, Bilbray, et al).
Topinka in IL.
Well, there goes my dinner...
But, seriously, we can still stop that RINO twit in the general (which, alas, means that the incumbent gets a 2nd, but short term pain means long-term gain).
ToPinko makes Schwarzenegger and Bloomberg look moderate.
Sorensen may not QUITE be in her league, liberal-wise, but then Idaho ain't Illinois. Thank God.
Schwartz in Michigan in 2004.
We really need a run off system.
That would create a situation where the true makeup of a district was more accurately reflected, that's for sure.
In states where laws can be voted on in referendums, primary runoffs could be persued through that means.
I don't know if it is just referenda states.
NC has primary runoffs remember the Vern Robinson race. Also Louisiana has the strange jungle primary. Plus GA has that top 2 general election run off, that is how Coverdell won.
GA legislative 'Rats quickly rescinded that after Coverdell upended Sen. Wyche Fowler in '92 (Fowler won the initial general, but with a narrow plurality, and lost the runoff).
Yes. Where would the Dems be without the Libertarian spoiler.?
Well, Cantwell would certainly be at home instead of in DC, as would Tim Johnson, and Harry Reid.
Although I would tend to lean towards what you're saying as common sense, it's also possible that some of those Libertarians might not necessarily vote GOP at all (not to say they would vote 'Rat, but that they wouldn't turn out at all -- and given the dealings I've had with them, I know some just want to turn out to vote just for their candidate and might not come out otherwise), so some of those outcomes might've been the same (minus the Libertarian in the mix).
I have to agree with you that many people who vote third party do so believing that there is no difference between the 2 major party candidates, but on balance I would suspect that more Libertarians and Constitution Party voters are more inclined to vote GOP than Dem, if they vote at all. Just as Greenies are more inclined to vote Dem than GOP.
So you can not say that all or even most of those votes would have swung, but when you need less than 1,000 it seems likely you might get at least that. Also Coverdell/Fowler race tends to back up my initial opinion, but that is just one isolated incident.
I was engaged in an argument sometime ago regarding, for example, the Oregon Governor's race of '02, saying that had the Libertarian not been in the race, GOPer Kevin Mannix would be running for his 2nd term now. But as was pointed out, my assumption that those same Libertarians would've even shown up to vote absent a candidate for them and that Ted Kulongoski might still have won, might've proven in error.
The only bonafide contest I'm sure where a 3rd party cost us an office was when the rightist American Independent Party had a candidate in the State Comptroller race in '02 in CA. Mind you, it might not have been particularly important in another state, but this was the Tom McClintock race, and McClintock was the highest vote getter of any Republican in California that cycle, and had the 3rd party candidate withdrawn and endorsed McClintock, which would've resulted in a win, the likelihood as the sole GOP statewide officeholder at that time might've seen him become the "anointed" GOP recall candidate for Governor rather than the current RINO occupant.
A run off system is need for the 2008 primaries. With conservatives dividing their votes, it will easy for RINOs like Rudy, McCain, or Mitt to sneak right to the GOP nomination.
I like runoffs, but should point out that in this case, the '08 GOP race seems to be full of RINOs.
Which could mean they'll split up all the RINO votes, allowing a conservative to easily capture the nomination.
Bill Sali is the real deal BUMP!
God bless you for your work on his behalf.
Where are you? Hopefully here in Idaho.